tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN November 11, 2015 1:00pm-3:01pm EST
screening because they work there. they have an hspd-12 compliant i.d. card, a background investigation, they're known but that doesn't mean they're not having an issue that may cause them do harm to co-workers. so we think our facilities are secure based on the security level. a recruiting station may be a secure level one. there might be five recruiters there and i was a recruiter back in my time in the army so i'm glad you're doing the work you're doing in those stations but how do you balance that out? because i know as a recruiter i wanted these guys and girls to come into the office. come in and join the army. they're not going to want to do that if they have to go through a bunker to get into the office and say "what's going on here? i don't want to join this place." so it's a balance. how do you balance that out? i know that's a big issue that d.o.d. is working with. for us, if we can put -- this happened with gabrielle giffords several years ago at the safeway when she was shot. we met with capitol police and
the senate and house senate arms and we recommended it would be nice if you can move those district offices into the gsa facilities we protect because anyone coming in there will go through screening and we'll know anyone going to that auditorium for that speech doesn't have a weapon because they've been cleared. but then the members of congress say, well, i need to be with my people, i need to meet them and see them where they are not -- i don't want them to have to come through this gauntlet to see me so it's a heck of a balance. i think it's something all of us are working towards to make sure our people are safe. >> lamar, do you have anything to add? >> from a local perspective, any types of intelligence that dictate there is's a threat or anything directed toward a military recruiting facility or base we would pick up either through our joint terrorism task force or it comes through our fusion center, the rtac who monitors various different systems, guardian, e-guardian
and your system is built into that system as well so when suspicious activity, threats come through we have different contingency plans where we will send officers to recruiting locations. some for just visibility, sometimes they'll have to check in. it depends on the level of the threat. we're tied into that actively as well. >> thank you. this last question, i'd like to take this woman here who had her hand up earlier. >> thank you, i'm from "army times" and my question is primarily for general smith regarding training the reservists for contingencies. and i'm wondering if you feel that reservists need more training opportunities and training exercises to prepare and if so do you have enough resources under current budget constraints to conduct those training)hyhr opportunities? >> that's a great question and
one of the challenges for this when we look to arm service members in the united states is we have to be mindful of the laws and the authorities that we have. the office of the provost marshal general, n the third row, his team is putting together training programs for reservists who we would choose to arm so they understand what the procedures are, what their authorities are and how best to manage. we would call it rules on the use of force. so from an army reserve standpoint we've reached out and have begun some of that training. we here in a position to be prepared to respond if the commander chooses to do that. you recall earlier i mentioned commanders have the authority to do that and everyone has been tasked to develop a plan for their particular off installation facility. so whether it's a small
detachment with a company on it or a larger installation that has ten or 12 units so it's the commander's responsibility: they look at people with the proper background checks and so forth. defer to people that have a law enforcement black ground. they could be military police soldiers, enlisted officers serving in the unit or members of local law enforcement that have authority to carry a weapon and know what the local jurisdiction responsibilities are and the local laws. as far as funding. funding is extremely tight but safety is important so this is a priority for our service members, for our commanders and it further stresses the importance of the linkage, the partnership and team work with local law enforcement. >> that's what i was going to add. that is yet another area that dictates that you have
understands with your local law enforcement so that everybody knows the roles and responsibilities when something happens crucial if you think about what we've talked about before, until this point local law enforce system the first responders. as we arm soldiers, or prepare to, they could be coming upon a scene where there's somebody else armed in addition to the bad guy so we don't want our good guy soldiers that are responding to be misconstrued as adversaries by local law enforcement so it's extremely important to not only have the training but do the exercises with local law enforcement so they can understand interoperability is essential there. our first default is always to partner with local law enforcement before we go to any decision like that. >> before we thank our panel for
their participation i want to thank you for joining us. we had a good turnout here despite the competing presentation and we went ten minutes over, my apologies there. i also want to thank -- i counted eight working level one and two star, nine if you count the three star. the --in the audience today so i want to thank you for your level of interest on what is an important topic and we look forward to continuing the conversation during the remainder of the conference. so please join me in thanking our panelist for an interesting day. [ applause ]
on this veterans day, a live look at the vietnam memorial in washington, d.c. a wreath-laying ceremony under way this afternoon. >> off to our left, i believe, there's the mayor's vigil society. [ applause ] we should all take a moment to thank the volunteers, the staff of the vietnam veterans fund and the national park service for all they do year round to honor veterans and preserve the wall and its sight. >> a number of events occurring at the nation's military
memorials on this veterans day. there are about 23 million living veterans in the u.s. and about one and a half million of them are over 85 years old. the largest veterans age group is between 65 and 69. there are more than one and a half million female veterans in the u.s. earlier today, president obama participated in the annual wreath-laying at the tomb of the unknown soldier at arlington national cemetery followed by comments by the president and other national figures. you can see the entire event tonight at 8:00 eastern on our companion network c-span and the video is also available at cspan.org. well, it was raining today in new hampshire when senator kelly ayotte spoke at the state veterans cemetery annual veterans day observance but it was sunny in kentucky when senate majority leader mitch mcconnell addressed a veterans day audience in shelbyville. this picture was treated out by
louisville tv reporter chris williams. later today 59:30 eastern, c-span 2 will be live with a discussion on what's next for turkey after results of recent elections there. the conversation takes place at the bipartisan policy center. a signature feature on c-span 2 is our coverage of book fairs and festivals with non-fiction author talks and interviews. coming up, book tv will be live from the 32nd annual book fair. our coverage starts saturday november 21. authors include representative john lewis discussing his book "marge." a live kotalk with peggy noonan. journalist judith miller talks about her book "the story, a reporter's journey" and newsman ted koppel on his book, "lights
out, a cyber attack, a nation unprepared, surviving the aftermath." speak with authors live. first, p.j. o'rourke takes a look at his book "thrown under the omnibus." then joy reid will take calls about her book "fracture, barack obama, the clintons and the racial divide." join us live from miami on c-span 2's book tv. follow and tweet us your questions @booktv and the @c-span on twitter. veterans advocates talk about the need to boost federal support for suicide prevention efforts particularly for recently deployed soldiers and reservists. this discussion hosted by the american foundation for suicide prevention is an hour.
good morning, herb. thank you for attending this briefing with joe donnelly. we're dedicated to preventing suicide through education, advocacy and research. it's my pleasure today to introduced three distinguished panelists that are going to talk about the military and veteran suicide prevention in mental health issues in our country. it is afsp's goal to reduce suicide 20% by 2025. and in order to do this we are going to have to address issues around suicide prevent that plague our veteran and military communities. currently, 22 veterans as an estimate die by suicide everyday and veterans comprise and estimated 20 october of suicides in this country every year. on the panel today we have yoki
dreazen, the author of "the invisible front: love and loss in an endless era of war." yoki is the managing editor for news at foreign policy where he overseas a team of 13 reporters. his book was picked as one of "new york times" most notable books of 2014 and one of amazon's best books of 2014. mr. dreazen had made 12 trips to iraq and afghanistan and has spent a total of nearly four years on the ground in the two countries mostly doing front line combat embeds. he is reported for more than 20 countries including pakistan, russia, china, israel, japan, turkey, morocco and saudi arabiarabi arabia. bill rauch is the political director of afghan and pakistan
soldiers of america. he supports advocacy campaigns with government agencies. bill is a former army major who served 17 months in iraq and has broad experience working with veterans and veterans' issues from his work on several major political campaigns to serving his team red, white, and blue chapter captain for his local community in alexandria, virginia. bill has appeared on "nbc nightly news," c-span's "washington journal" and msnbc's coverage of memorial day 2015. last we have major general mark ram. he's the senior director at rutgers ubhc national call center and director of vets for warriors. general graham has lost two sons to two different battles, one to suicide and the other to an ied
in iraq. graham currently heads the rutgers ubhc call center and is the director of vet for warriors which provides veterans with 24/7 confidential stigma-free peer support by veterans to active duty, national guard, and reserve service members, veterans, retirees and their families and caregivers. we thank you all for coming together and now i would like to introduce senator donnelly who as senator from indiana introduced his first piece of legislation when he came to the senate, the jacob sexton military suicide prevention act. has been awarded the allies in action afwrard the american foundation for suicide prevention as a champion of veteran and military mental health and suicide prevention issues. senator? >> thank you all for being here
and to our panel, thank you so much. we really appreciate it. and to john and trevor, thank you. i guess the best way to start off would be to talk about the incredible dedication and hard work of all of our men and women who serve and of the love and devotion of the people of this country for all of them. and then to tell you a little bit about a national guard unit in evansville, indiana, my home sta state. when our national guard was serving they were in iraq in 2008 and extraordinarily difficult circumstances and when they talked to each other they said "we have each other's back. that's what we do, we have each other's back." it was a group that was in a truck there, one was the driver, one was the lookout who made sure everybody was safe, another was a navigator.
they're all working in that truck together and for a year they had each other's lives in each other's hands. the most intense effort you could imagine. they came home to evansville and the streets were lined with people cheering when our national guard group got home. and they did. and they began to live their lives again back home in indiana and from twaech to 2015 four of the members of that national guard group have taken their lives. and it is hard breaking and it has to end. and so that's what these wonderful people and all of you are trying to help us do. in toward as my first piece of legislation as a senator we were able to pass the jacob sexton military suicide prevention act. and what it did -- jake was a wonderful, wonderful young man
who served in iraq and afghanistan. whose family and he helped provide coats and other things to kids in afghanistan when it got cold. but jake had an unbelievable choice he is had to make and that's what our military has to do. incredibly difficult choices. life or death, one side or the other and came back home on r&r in afghanistan. when he got back home took his life. and also told his dad before he went on that tour. he said "dad, i just don't feel right. something doesn't feel like it's working." and it's not just those who are in combat, as you all know. it's people back home as well with the stresses of finance and family trying to balance the national guard and a career and the family and the financial stressors and so we want to make sure we're there for all of
them. so what the jacob sexton military suicide prevention act did was provide an annual mental health assessment for each and every service member, active duty, guard, reserve. and then provided by privacy protections so that there was the chance for them to seek this help and to be able to do it with privacy. this past year -- and we're hoping we'll get past today -- you know, got willing in thendaa, we're hoping to find providers to do the mental health assess some what this does is for private providers in evansville and princeton and richmond, indiana, and all over the country that they can go to places like the military family research institute at purdue and all other the country and get the special training needed so that when our service member
comes in our guard member, our reserve member and our vets that they know this person understands the special challenges they face. they get what's called the vet friendly service member friendly certification and then there's an online registry. so that our vets and service members can go online and go this person gets it. somebody i can talk to and feel comfortable with. and then for the department of defense folks that they take additional training in suicide risk reck nation so they can start to understand and we also are trying to add additional physicians assistants so we have more front-line providers to help our men and women. you know, our guard members, think of this, when they finish up they can't go to the v.a. they're not officially allowed to. they can't go to military treatment facilities.
they don't often know about what other available services are out there and so often times they feel like they're by themselves and there is a transition that takes place when you go from one to the other. we find ourselves with challenges with the formulary as well which is what we're going to also work on and what that means is the formulary is so you're in d.o.d. -- the department of defense -- you're in that system. you're struggling and so they give you prescriptions to help and take care of yourself, then you become a veteran and they completely change what you're on because x y z is not covered by the v.a. the v.a. covers f, g, h. so something you've begun to feel comfortable with that is working for you completely changes and we have to make this seamless. we have to make the handoff seamless. and we have to recognize we've
been a nation at war for such a long time and in many ways young people like our guard members come home and there's a complete disconnect to the community that loves them so much, to the world they used to be a part of, but before they went and then when they served they see things and deal with things that completely change their lives and the incredible dependence of knowing people count on you for their entire life. you're in a mission that everyday you're under incredible stress and our panel knows much better than i do. and then you come home and it's just different and we want to be there to help but we not only want to be there to help, we have an obligation to be there to help, to make sure that if someone has a question, there's someone there to provide an answer. that they feel comfortable this
that there's no stigma. that if they're feeling sideways they know who they can call. they have the opportunity to talk to somebody. that's our job. that's what we need to do. we lost over 400 young men and women last year just in the military to suicide. we lost over the 22 veterans yesterday, the day before, and the day before and we want to get it to zero. so trevor and john, thank you. to our panelists, thank you so much. thank you for your son -- sons who have served, for all your family has sacrificed and we're incredibly grateful for your help in trying to provide answers. thank you very much. [ applause ] >> thank you again senator donnelly for your comments and your true leadership in the
united states senate to pro vent suicide among our veterans, military personnel and provide support to their families. next i'd like to introduce yoki dreazen. >> good morning. it's a pleasure to be with you on this rainy, rainy day. setting aside journalistic objectivity for a moment, senator, your leadership on this is a wonderful thing to see. i wish you were frankly not so often standing by yourself on an issue that matter a much as this one does. i want to talk briefly about the issue to frame it a little bit and then turn it over to my friend. in 2009, i began to hear from friends who had come back that they would look in the mirror and not recognize themselves. these were military friends i met over the years in iraq and afghanistan that they could see in the eyes of their wife or their husband that they were scared. that they could see in the eyes of their children that they were
scared. that they themselves felt ugly. they felt disfigured by what they had seen or done. they knew they had changed but didn't know how or why or how to change it. some of them over facebook or e-mail or by phone began to say that they were thinking of killing themselves. nay just didn't want to live in the way they were living. they didn't want to keep feeling what they were feeling. a couple of those that i knew did kill themselves and this was shattering on a personal level. again, setting aside anything journalistic. these were guys i had known and been with in both countries. these were guys who made it back physically unscathed for the most part but they came back with something inside of them all the same, with darkness they didn't know how to deal with. if they were reservists there was no support structure. as flawed as the active duty support structure, it exists. for the guard and reserve there's nothing. so they came back into a military that wasn't ready to help and a civilian role more disconnected than it has ever been from the military and they came back in enormous numbers.
up until 2009 the military suicide rate had been steadily rising but the military response was "we have a problem but you civilians have just as bad of a problem." and that was literally factually true. if you look at the demographics in the civilian world, if you look at men between 18 and 25 which is generally speaking the demographic of the military the two suicide rates were rising at roughly the same rate. 2009 was a horrifyingly important year. that was the first year where the military suicide rate exceeded that of the civilian suicide rate and it's kept growing. so if you think at one point they were rising kind of like this, 2009 is when the military rate pulled ahead and kept going higher and higher and higher and there had been a reluctant at n the military to acknowledge what they were seeing which was a legitimate epidemic by 2009 that didn't happen anymore. they had no way of refusing to acknowledge what they were seeing because the numbers were so stark and they were so
horrifying. knowing as many people as i did who were struggling i began to ask of the pentagon whether there were people i should get to know, people who were trying to fight this in creative ways or energetic way, people who acknowledged the problem early and were trying to devote themselves to solving it and i kept hearing the name of mark graham again and again and again and people would say the story of him and his wife carol. i'll let mark who is a close friend talk about it rather than trying to speak for him. but it was hard for me to believe, frankly, because usually you don't meet generals who have lost children. you don't meet a general who has lost one child, let alone two and it seemed incomprehensible level of loss, especially for a person who served their country for as long and honorably as a general like mark graham would have. but i got to know him and i went to fort carson where he was in command to find out what it was he was trying to do. what it was he had uncovered. what mark found at fort carson was a base that had one of the highest suicide and homicide rates in the country. right before he got there, there
was a unit, a single unit with the horrifyingly apt nickname of lethal warriors that killed 11 people. soldiers and civilians in and around the base. this had never been seen before by a single unit. this was new and horrifying so mark got there he had the darkness of suicide and the darkness of homicide and these were the things he devoted himself to fighting while he was there. part of the cause of what he was trying to fight, part of the cause of what he had seen, senator donnelly eluded to the word, stigma. that's a clinical word i would like to put in human terms, to describe what stigma is. how it manifests itself. here are a couple of ways. it manifests itself in an enlisted officer at fort carson who told another enlisted soldier who was suffering from ptsd "kill yourself and save me the paperwork." it manifested itself in a soldier who came back wanting to kill himself, scrawling with black paint on a white wall what was basically a suicide note. thankfully he got the help he
needed and was taken to a hospital, he ultimately thankfully survived and is still alive today. but the military response was this man defaced government property so we'll bring him on military charges of having done so. so his mother called the base and said, again, this is the mother of a son who almost killed himself and said if i come and repaint that wall can my son go? and they said sure. so she came, spent a saturday repainting an entire wall again, the mother of a son who almost killed himselfened the military looked at that nicely painted wall and charged the son anyway. these are the kind of things that when we talk of stigma we're talking about. a callousness and cruelty. we're talking about soldiers and marines feeling that they f they seek help their careers will end. that they'll be mocked by the people around them. they'll be derided and seen as people not weorthy of wearing te
uniform. they're the people who came back from iraq and afghanistan and are scared. not the people that have any struggle that a is a real struggle. there was one case i wrote about in the book in which a colonel getting ready to deploy looked at a soldier who was underperforming and tried to kick him out and said "this soldier is overweight, this soldier is showing up late for formation, there's something off about him, he's getting into fights with people" and tried to kick him out. mark looked at the same case and thought this is a soldier whose record before he deployed was perfect. it's different since he got back. this soldier has ptsd and needs help. so mark reached down from the height of bag two-star general into this particular brigade and saved the career of that young soldier. for people within the military, people who look in the military from outside it's the definition of hierarchy and it's extremely rare for a general to reach down into a specific brigade and say to the colonel "you're wrong" and reverse the decision.
this was not popular. it was profoundly unpopular. i spoke to the colonel for the book. he's a very good man. one of the problems with this issue that there are not only no silver bullets but very rarely is it black and white. very rarely is there a villain and a hero, most often it's in the gray. and this colonel had the point. i need to deploy the best soldiers i have and this is not one of them. and mark had a point. he's not one of them because he needs help. but it gives you a sense of the complexity of what the military is fighting against and what we as a civilian world are fighting against. and with this i'll close. we like to look at the military from outside and say it's its own world we're not part of the military has made a gigantic mistake by consolidating itself on massive bases in the country, deep in texas, deep in kansas in places where the average civilian would never go. if you live in one of the coastal cities -- washington being the exception, you might
never see anybody who serves except in the airport. you probably don't know anybody who serves. you probably have zero exposure so it's easy to say whatever is happening to the military is its own beast. that's its own world but it's not. the military reflects our country and comes from our country. what impacts the one impacts the other. from the moment the car was created up until 2010 more people died in car crashes than anything but illness and that was the case from when the first model t rolled off of the assembly lines. 2010 that changed. it was another momentous year. that was the year the civilian suicide rate. the number of people killing themselves exceeded the number dying in car crashes. think about that for a moment. all of us if we're watching news or reading local papers there's the horrible stories of a crash on highway x killed y number of people and we see those and shudder. know when you're seeing that that same way, more people --
not military, more people total americans -- are killing themselves than are dying in those car crashes. and that is a staggering thing. i want to close with that because we owe the military more than simply saying thank you for your service. and we frankly owe the military more than trying to understand that it is a military that reflects us. we owe the military the knowledge that we as a country understood what it as a part of our country is going through. that we as a country understood what those who serve are going through. whether they're guard, whether they're reserve, whether they're active duty, it doesn't matter. these are people who either wear or have worn our uniform. who either are fighting or have fought in our wars. afghanistan as we know is not ending. we thought it was and it's not. iraq we thought was over. still going. and even when these wars end this is the most chilling thing i found for the book, even when these wars end the number of people with ptsd won't end. the number of cases that manifest themselves decades in some cases after a person serve willed not end. the suicide rate is not going to
stop. we'd like to believe i think and those in the military who are fighting this, bill, mark, other decent wonderful people, they know better. but there's a hope throughout that when the guns of war fall silent the suicide rate will stop or slow and that's not true. ptsd can go on for decades. someone can be fine and 30 years from now something changes and they take their own life. we're seeing that. for a long time the people who killed themselves most frequently were high school and college students. now we're seeing suicide rates among men in their 50s skyrocket. some of these men were veterans so maybe it was ptsd. some of these men have lost their jobs and are correctly figuring they will never work in the same way again but it's jumping for those men i want to close with that. understand as you're listening to my friend mark i should point out that when my wife and i discovered we were having a baby boy after we spoke to our parents and my wife's siblings the first call after that was to mark and his wife carol. they're family to us there's
zero attempt for me to say these are people i just wrote about. i love them dearly. but as you're listening to mark and bill, keep that in mind. these are not people speaking only about and for the military, they're speaking about our country. i'll close there. [ applause ] >> thanks, yochi. senator donnelly, thank you for the leadership and the legislation you proposed and we hope many, many rally behind what you're doing there. trevor thank you, the american foundation for suicide prevention for all you're doing each and every day. thanks to yochi, of course. he's family. spent a lot of time with yochi in the last few years as he was writing the book and to my good friend bill rauch with iava and the work he and so many others do out there everyday. today is the marine corps birthday so happy birthday to the marine corps, semper fi.
[ applause ] i'm an army guy so i'll say "hoo" instead of "booyah." but tomorrow is veterans day and we want to thank our great american veterans and their families for all they continue to do for our nation each and everyday. so what do you call when you're home alone at night and afraid, isolated, you don't know what to do or where to turn. who do you call? i run a program at rutgers now, interesting story how i got there but i run a program at rutgers called vets 4 warriors. vets, the number four, warriors. in 24 hours a day, seven days a week a veteran answers the phone within 30 seconds. they're trained in a program called reciprocal peer support. it's set up to where veterans an the call, there's a clinician on site 24 hours a day so whether you're active duty, national guard, reserve, family member or
caregiver, no matter what your status, no matter what your discharge you can call that number anonymously or confidentially. we don't care if you tell us your name or where you live, you can call and talk to a veteran who gets it, who understand what is you're going through. 24 hours a day. who do you call? who do they call in the middle of the night? i wish my son kevin had had a phone number to call. our son kevin died by his own hand. kevin took his own life and died by suicide in june of 2003. he was getting ready to go to the army's advance camp having finished his third year of rotc at the university of kentucky. kevin was a straight a student, a pre-med student and was going to be an army doctor. kevin took his own life. he was struggling with depression. didn't even tell his brother and sister he was struggling so there was huge stigma. kevin was on medication, came off his medication. i'll never forget when we found
out later that one of the kids in his apartment was using his computer in kevin's room when he walked out and took the punchout from the medication and said "who's on this?" it was kevin, and he was embarrassed. he felt it was a character flaw. so the stigma that yochi mentioned and i'll talk about is deadly. oweky. this is a deadly stigma. we can change it. people say how can we change the stigma ma? we can do this, america do k do anything if we put our minds to it and our resources and research behind it. eight months after we lost our son kevin, our son jeff was a second lieutenant armor officer who graduated as an engineer from university of kentucky, jeff was killed in iraq by an ied. eight months later, they were best friends as well as brothers and we have a daughter melanie who is a nurse in new york city now and she's married to another great veteran, joe quinn, so i'll talk just a few minutes about vet 4 warriors and thinking if jeffrey had come back, would he have had a number to call?
would jeffrey have been able to call someone? whether he survived that ied or not he'd have been struggling, of course. how do you not? many that have not deployed are struggling as well. so vets 4 warriors, our premise is how do we help those struggling before they're in crisis? we have crisis lines in our nation and they're very much needed but how do we help upstream? how do we help before they're in crisis? so the idea is call vets for 4 war warriors and talk to a veteran who request work with you to get you through whatever you're going through so you can come out the other side and thrive and do great things because everyone's going through something, right? aren't we all going through something? either you personally or someone you know you're going through something so let's help those that are struggling, whether it's them or their family members they can all call. we have army, navy, air force, marine corps veterans on staff. we have every era covered from
iraq to afghanistan so we have all the bases covered around the clock to connect you to somebody who can work with you, they can connect you to local resources. i say there's a lot of veterans service organizations out there i say we're not looking for your rice out of your rice bowl. everybody is guarding their rice bowl. we want to be the soy sauce. we want to be out there so people can know we have a 24 hour day seven day a week call center. you can call any time day or night. you're never alone. you never have to feel like you're alone, you can call. we connect you to local resources if you're struggling whenever you need. we like to connect them to the organizations you talked about as well to get them care. i'll give you a couple examples. we had a veteran in a hotel recently -- it was a motel struggling. we don't do many crisis calls, we transfer those to the crisis line but we can do crisis calls as well and we had a veteran
call struggling hard in a motel and after a long conversation with a peer and one of the clinicians got involved they caulked to this veteran and helped convince him and he decided they were right, he went outside, locked his weapon in the trunk of his car because that's the only safe place he had to put the weapon. they contacted the local police at his agreement, he agreed he needed help after they talked him through it, police officer came, took him to the emergency room, from there they took him to a v.a. hospital where they admitted him, the peer asked the police officer can you please call us back once he's safe? the police officer called him back and guess what? the police officer was a veteran. he got it. just one example. another is a grandmother who called worried about her grandson in korea he sent her a note on facebook and said he's struggling so his grandmother found out and called three or four other places then got ahold of one of our peers who started
making connections and got to the army and others and got ahold of this young guy and chain of command did a great job and took care of him. got him help. of course he's sent another note to his grandma and said "grandma, please don't do that again." but everyday no matter what the challenge is they're there. we follow up. you call us once, we follow up. as long as it takes. a couple veterans have been calling us for over a year saying you know, i just -- they call us and we call them back and they say "i just want to know somebody's going to call me back." we feel like one of the things we offer is a safety net. they need a safety net. they're in transition. transitions are hard. all of our veterans have transitions. we hire over 46 veterans to do this. they're not volunteers, we pay them. so we hire, we train veterans to do this great work to help others. all the time, around the clock. you know, prevention is key. we have to do this early. let's not wait until they're in
crisis to help the them let's offer help for them now to be the safety net, fill gap and help them as they transition, whether it's transitioning out of the military or from active guard service to normal drill status. there's so many times when they're out there that they can fall through the cracks and we want to be there for them. i wish my boys had a phone number to call. i certainly wish my son kevin had before he took his own life. but we can eliminate the stigma ma in america. i know we can because i believe in our nation each and everyday. and i will tell you before i get off the stage beth foyers is here to help not judge. it's stigma free. when you walk in, you're entering the stigma free zone. we are here to help and not judge. we'll help them work through it together. many of them feel like they're getting whit a fire hose of issues, everything is coming at them with the stress so peers
help them break it down into garden hoses. what's the toughest thing you're going through today? how can we help you today? let's work through it together. and one veteran at a time. one army, navy, air force and marine corps service member at a time one family member or caregiver at a time, that's how we solve this. i thank you again for doing this and senator donnelly thank you for your leadership. yochi, thanks again for your great friendship and family and, bill, love you, brother, thanks to the veterans out there for your service and family members for sticking with them. i end as i always do, this is the land of the free because of the brave. and i'll tell you, vets for warriors is 855-838-8255. don't wait. don't wait. call. you're not alone. thank you. [ applause ]
>> i want to start by thinking -- thanking mark specifically and sharing an anecdote before i thank everyone else. i know mark because his son-in-law joe quinn and i graduated west point together and we were good friends and we were in baghdad together. joe was his aide-de-camp when we were stationed in one of those places no one would go to if we fwhrnt the military. now i would never go back now that i'm not in the military. and joe jokes that as your aide two things would happen when he started to date melanie. he would either marry her or go to jail and we're glad he's part of the family now. we've known mark for a while. and we want to thank senator donnelly and your staff. you're a tremendous leader. thank you so much for everything you do to change the culture, the sigma and to promote community and awareness like you do. thank you. to afsp, amazing partners, thank you so much for what you do, two
friends on the panel that we talk about that so often because it touches us so much. i just realized yochi commented me on my tie, i've worn this tie the last three or four times we've spoken on the same panel it's red, white and blue so that's probably why i gravitate towards it. but i want to tell a couple stories because i talk about the policy agenda where our number one priority is combatting suicide in this country. the first story i want to tell is related to a point someone mentioned a momenting that this is a problem for our country, not just the military. i was speaking with a reporter last night about the medal of honor recipients from iraq and afghanistan and the most recent recipient, an army captain was involved in an attack in afghanistan not long ago where a friend of mine, mayor tom kinney died and i started to think about that last night when i
went to bed, i started thinking about tk as the most recent friend i've had who's died as a result of these wars and i asked myself, who was the first person, who was the first person? i started to go through a list of names. scott shimp, he died in a training accident at fort campbell, i don't think he was the first. jim, no he wasn't the first. and actually the first person in my class, 2002 west point who died was a cadet who died by suicide before the war started. he was home on christmas leave and didn't come back and we didn't know how to talk about it. he's not on our web site if you look at the list of the names of the fallen so that got me to think about two things i'm going to talk about today, community and culture. it was described as stigma. the culture is such where we don't talk about mental health. we don't talk about suicide. one of the amazing things that i personally as an army veteran
who left active duty eight years ago and reserves two years ago that i love about the legislation the senator sponsored and it's going to make a huge impact in the culture of the military is the idea of an annual checkup. i have a young son who is two and he's been to the dentist twice, very painful visits both times but i am embedding in him that he is going to go to the dentist everyday year. it was embedded in me. that's part of the culture that i was raised in. it sounds silly, what does that have to do with mental health? it has everything to do with it because in this country the idea of getting a checkup once a year for your mental wellness is foreign to most people so when you start to look at in the that context -- and i'm going to bring up mark again because another element of joe quinn and i and our friendship and relationship was in april of
2007 i was in iraq, i thereby about ten months. i had to be there for another seven and i had a rap on my door and my commander john sims, who's a dear friend of mine and mentor said "you have a phone call." and i was with joe quinn. i was with my good battle buddy joe quinn. it was my father to tell me my sister, my oldest sister never served a day in the military had died by suicide. she's taken her own life. and it got me thinking, you know, wow, how did this happen? here i was in iraq and baghdad and i didn't see those signs, i didn't know the signs but, again, going back to the culture piece one no one in my family were prepared, no one in my community where i grew up were aware of what the signs were. so even though she served in the military, it highlights the point that this is a challenge for our entire nation and
country. so when i talk about culture and community, it truly does impact all of us. and i usually ask folks to participate and i'm not going to do it today but because we're on c-span i'm going ask folks at home to participate and that is ask yourself -- and i promise you don't have to raise your hand. how many of you know someone that you love or care about that's died by suicide. all of us know someone. so why wouldn't we educate ourselves to be aware of the signs because it's a situation we can tackle. so i can talk about the policy agenda. it's powerful. we've worked tirelessly on it. we've worked with partners on the hill, vets for warriors, others. but when we start to look at the policy component, good policy
changes culture while leveraging community and that's what it's all about. that's why we were really proud to support and pass the clay hunt save act. clay was a marine and i think it's apt we talk about him today on the marine pass the clay hunt act. and it's important to talk about him who tried tirelessly to get into the v.a. and he koophe cou receive the help that he needed. and then i think about those who aren't as driven as motivated as clay was who have an even more difficult time trying to get over those barriers that exist. and as veterans, i feel very privileged that i have a v.a. to go to. i received care in a private sector as well as the v.a. and i know that the barriers to entry are different for each sector, but i feel very privileged that i can go to the v.a. and talk to folks about some of the trauma that i've experienced that is unique to war. but i also think about my sister and i think about other folks, the guardsman in indiana, the
reservists that i served with, who don't have the access to the v.a. necessarily. and then go back into these small towns and big cities across the country and they feel alone. i felt alone in a very different way when i left the reserves than i did on active duty. i wasn't worse or better, just uniquely different. because i was already in the exact same community i had been serving in, i had left, and then i thought i'm living in the same house, i had the same neighbors and yet you still have that aloneness and that sense of-will-or lack of community i should say. and so i think in closing from my perspective, tomorrow is veterans day and we're proud to have over 150 events across the country tomorrow where individuals will come together across the country. and tomorrow is veterans day, but every day we should be striving to build community and change the culture. and we should think about resources like vets for warriors. if you haven't read it, read the
book. it's phenomenal. i gave it as a gift to my parents. and i read it multiple time tsz even knowing the story. educate yourself. getting a difference in your community and ask how can you help. because this is a problem that affects the entire country and we can be leaders on this just like senator donnelly has been a leader here in d.c., we can be leaders in our towns of alexandria, new jersey, all across the country. so that's what i want to leave everyone with, ask yourself especially with tomorrow being veterans day, what can you do personally. because when you raised your happene hand, or you didn't raise your happened, we all know someone who has been touched by this. and there is something that we can do about it. so thank you again to afsp for being an amazing partner. thank you to my friends for sharing their story and allowing me to share mine. thank you. >> i can't thank you enough for
being here today and continue to stand in awe every time i see you all talk about this subject. at this point i would like to turn it over to the audience breefrly if the l briefly if there are any questions. >> -- suicide prevention -- i'm sorry -- and mental health in veterans? i don't think that was addressed as much. >> yes, i will. so that actually was the clay hunt save act. thank you for bringing that up. and that bill did a few things. first and foremost, it was the first bill passed by this congress addressing mental health in the military and federal population. and again, it was named after clay hunt who was a proud that reason who served in iraq and afghanistan. one of the things the bill did is it provided an incentive for mental health professionals to go to the v.a.
so allowed the vh.v.a. up to i believe it was about $30,000 or $40,000 in student debt repayment that would help them recruit mental health professionals. there is a shortage across the country. again, this affects all of us. so that is one of the things that it did. another thing it did is it mandated a website to bring all of the many raprograms that the v.a. has into one location which allows an individual to go to one place to find out where all the resources are and then it also required an annual assessment of those programs, something we didn't talk about today. but there are so many efforts out there. one of the challenges, how do we measure outcomes. we know vets for warriors is doing tremendous work because of the impact they have. let's try and look at things using similar assessments at v.a. and that was another thing it's it up. we've also called on congress to have a public hearing to track on the status of that. we've been working with the v.a.
and their mental health professionals to ensure that they're informed and they have the tools they immediate to ine implement. we're confident over the three year period because it's a trial bill we'll find out ways to improve the services at v.a. that again we can replicate and learn from across the board. >> and if i could just add briefly to that. on the human level, one thing president obama did that was a somewhat massive change that didn't get quite as much attention as deserved, for all of american history really, presidential letters of condolence went only to those who died in service. so those who were killed in are war, those who tied in training accidents, but not those who died in suicide. and president obama changed that policy. so he was the first president to start writing letters of condolence for families of those who died at their own hand. which i interviewed one of those
families in my book. and for the family, that was a massive kindness because they would look to other families who had lost someone, and to them they felt the same hole, they mourned the same way, they had the same level of grief. and that letter from the white house meant a lot because that letter said in that case, a daughter, a wife, in this case your son served with honor and your son's death matters and we as a country recognize that. this i believe was 2009. >> you mentioned calling on congress to have a public hearing about the clay hunt act. was there anything else that you want congress to do to address this? >> well, i think what we would like congress to do, not just what i would like congress do, i think is to build on the success of clay hunt. i mean there were some things that weren't included. in our policy agenda, one of the things we talk about is access
to care. currently i'm enrolled at the v.a. as a result of the five year combat eligible requirement that allowed me when i came back from iraq to go to the v.a. and a enroll. and what we know is that many of the individuals who experience trauma, the challenges that they have and it was mentioned earlier that older men now we're starting to see an uptick of those individuals who are having challenges. it doesn't necessarily happen one, two, three years after you you come back. so one of our recommendations is to extend the he will fwabeligi 15 years. senator donnelly has been a champion for the community at large and he has a package and we've been collaborating with them. it's a very, very bold and what we think is a very sound policy that they're working with to not only address the d.o.d. side, but also the v.a. side. and so there are many things we can do. but again, there is the culture
piece, as well. having the president send the letter out, what a tremendous shift in culture. and so each congressperson can be leaders of change on this. i never knew anything about using the right language until my sister died by suicide. they can speak intelligently about it. they can share their stories. so there is the policy. but again, good policy will impact the culture and the community aspect, as well. >> i think some trouble with that whole thing of sending letters is that we don't get notified of people who have committed suicide. the newspapers don't report that either. we would be delighted -- not a good choice of words, but we would be honored to send that, but we don't get notified of it. so that's a hard part for us. i'm rebecca cotton with senator rich's office. may i ask a couple other
questions? i'd like to know, is the suicide rate from operation desert storm and operation freedom, i can't remember, is it similar to that of the vietnam era or the your korean era? it sounds that we hear more about it now that it's exponentially greater.era? it sounds that we hear more about it now that it's exponentially greater. but is it similar? >> it's a great question. and the honest truth is that the data because it wasn't tracked as closely, it's hard to parse. the feeling of many of those who study the issue is that it's worse. and it's worth taking a step back for a moment. what we now think of as ptsd has existed since people began picking up weapons against other people a millennia ago. in world war ii, you had half a
million troops discharged because of what were so-called psychiatric it disorders. so mostly men who fought as the greatest generation, half a million were sent home because they couldn't to it anymore. we had the idea of shell shock in vietnam. excuse me, world war 1. ptsd from vietnam. so the issue is not new and the toll it takes is not new. those who study the issue believe the suicide rate is now higher. two reasons briefly, the multiple deployments without question has driven that up. interestingly the majority of those who have killed themselves, a narrow majority, have not deployed. but still they're in units where the people around them all had. so even if they themselves hadn't, what they're hearing from the pmen and women next to them, this is what you're going to face. and the other issue aloued to by senator donnelly is prescription drug use. it's a problem that we as a
country, it's too high in the civilian world and too high in the military world. i was at a base where it was put in the valley and the taliban controlled the mountaintops and they were shelling the base day after day after day. there were 50 men at that base. 50. all 50 were taking prescription drugs. and they weren't taking them the dosages that you or and i might take, they were taking let's say six ambien. so multiple ofs what they should. and when they come back, either they go cold turkey and you can have rocket or they go down to what the normal prescription should be and that kind of change can lead to suicide. so it's not happened in previous wars the way it's happened now. i don't think a lot of research is going into that, but i don't
think we as a country have any sense of just how big of a problem it is. >> well, everybody, thank you again today for coming out and joining us for this important conversation. again, i have to thank partners like bill, yoky and mark at the american foundation for suicide found tags, we' prevention, we're working every day and volunteers across the country to prevent suicide. and with our partners, journalists, authors willing to speak up and out on the issue and folks like mark who i have a very fond love of at this point working with afsp, his wife carol, your daughter, melanie, vets for are warriors and the
important work you do every day and have done to prevent suicide. at sfsp, i think what bill said earlier really resonated with me. every day is vaetens day.asfsp,d earlier really resonated with me. every day is vaetens day.fsp, i earlier really resonated with me. every day is vaetens day. we're going work every day to prevent suicide among our nation's veterans and military personnel. and with partners like senator donnelly, the white house, congress and capitol hill inside and outside of government, we're going to get the job done. we will prevent suicide. thank you very much for coming out and have a wonderful day and a great veterans day tomorrow. [ applause ] a live look at the korean war memorial as a number of events are taking place at the
nation's military memorials. this is also arm made tis day marking the end of world war 1. it was feshly changed to veterans day on june 1 in 1954 to recognize all veterans and not just those who served in the first world war. earlier today, president obama participated in the annual wreath laying at the tomb of the unknown soldier at arlington national cemetery followed by comments by the president and other national figures. you can see the entire event at 8:00 eastern on c-span and the video is also available at
cspan.org. here is what some members of congress have been tweeting out. house speaker paul ryan had this picture taken with a korean veteran saying today and every day we honor those who have fought for our freedom. thank you for your service. and representative jackie any lur ski tweeted out this video saying honored to attend today's veterans day ceremony to honor and thank our veterans. later at 5:30, c-span2 will be live with a discussion on what is next for turkey after the results of recent elections in that country. the conversation takes place at bipartisan policy center. so to all of you, thank you for your support and to the kids for just saying no. thank you.
my hope is that the women of the future will feel truly free to follow whatever paths their talents point on. i think they thought that the white house was so glamorous and your role was so -- what you did was so glamorous, your life was so glamorous. and all they saw were the parties and the meeting people and -- and i've the got to tell you, i never worked harder in my life. >> nancy reagan served as long time political partner, ferocious protector and ultimately as caretaker for president ronald reagan. and involved first lady, she was active with key staff decisions, policy making and campaigning. she made drug use her signature initiative with her just say no campaign. nancy reagan, this sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's original series first ladies,
influence and image, examining the public and private lives of the women who filled the position of first lady and their influence on the presidency from marsha washington to michelle obama, sunday at 8:00 p.m. on c-spa c-span3. defense department chief information officer terry halverson spoke with with reporters about ongoing cyber security during a breakfast hosted by christian science monitor. it's about 50 minutes. okay, i think we're set. thanks for coming, everyone. i'm dave cook from "the monitor." our guest today is terry halvorsen, chief information officer for the defense department. he oversees the largest computer network.
he is accompanied by maryanne bailey whose role is deputy chief officer for the defense department. he holds a master's in educational technology from university of west florida. he served as an army intelligence officer and later as a civilian. he was deputy commander of navy cyber forces and then became the navy's chief information officer. he's been in his current role as pentagon's chief information officer since this march. ms. bailey has a bachelor of science degree from the university of maryland and a master's from the industrial college of the armed forces. she's been a member of the national security agency work force since 1984. thus ends the biographical portion of the program, now on to the riveting mechanical details. first, thanks to our underwriter, northrup grumman. as always, we are on the record here. please, no live blogging or tweeting. in short, no filing of any kind while the breakfast is under way to give us time to actually listen to what our guests say. there is no embargo when the session ends at 10:00 sharp.
to help you curb that relentless selfie urge, we will e-mail several pictures of the session to all the reporters here as soon as the breakfast ends. as regular attendees know, if you'd like to ask a question, please do the traditional thing and send me a subtle, non-threatening signal and i'll happily call on one and all. we're going to start off by offering our guests the opportunity of opening comments and we'll head around the table. with that, your breakfast is over. sorry about that, sir. thanks for coming. >> thank you. i'd like to thank all of you for taking time. i looked at the list, a pretty big list, i figured breakfast must be pretty good. that's why everybody is here. as the introduction mentioned, d.o.d. is the largest private network. people have heard me say this before, but i think it gets to our scale. if d.o.d. was a fortune 500
company, we would be fortune 0 in terms of how you want to measure it, forms of cash, defense. we are very, very large. we are also attacked more than anybody else. mary ann is my deputy for cybersecurity, and i thought maybe there might be some interest in cybersecurity questions, given some things that are going on in the world today. i'm going to focus my opening comments very quickly on three components, that while they are focused around cybersecurity, actually apply more broadly than that. i get a question all the time, what keeps me awake? and i think most people expect me to answer it's security or it's dollars. it's neither of those things, it's culture. we're in the midst of having to make some major culture changes,
and i want to say d.o.d., but i actually think in the nation, we'll have to make some culture changes. one of the things we have to do in d.o.d. is establish a culture of cyber discipline. when the internet started -- and we should take a minute and say happy birthday to the internet. the internet's birthday is today. it was the first arpanet connection across today, and i would mention it was a d.o.d. arpanet connection. so happy birthday to the internet. when it first started, it was a research connection built to share information. and it continued that way and people got to be that it was a trusted area, and frankly, it wasn't until it more matured that we started to see a series of bad actors on the internet, but they are out there today. but they're not visible like they are in the physical world. so i think it's easy for people
to forget that there are bad actors out there. it's certainly easy for parts of our workforce to do that, so we are really trying right now to make sure that people understand you got to go to the internet. it is an important part of our business and important part of our culture, but you have to go there with the right rules and right understandings, so you will see a lot of information on that. we have just signed out our cybersecurity implementation plan. the chairman and secretary signed out the cyber culture workpiece that talks about what we're trying to do. and it talks about leadership, accountability and transparency. because we face so many different threats, there's just different answers. the other part we have to do is move to the right side of cyber economics, which is another cultural change, because it means you have to understand economics much better in cyber than i think you do in other areas.
as a military area, cyber is one of the first big warfare areas where frankly, in phase zero and phase one, we have to worry about non-military targets being attacked, and they can be attacked in ways that don't look like they would be attacked. because we get much of our advantage from the way we use cyber and high technology, it's of course going to make us somewhat vulnerable to those types of attacks, and you want to think about some of the things that could cause us issues in a cyber world. just look at what would happen if someone disrupted wall street for the day and we're now talking about a trillion dollars. a trillion dollars any way you talk about it becomes strategic money. you could interrupt potentially the power grid. there are lots of things that you could do that would cause us great economic differences. the other problem we have today in this area is that it is much less expensive for someone to attack us than it is for us to defend, and we've got to turn that around. today, we are really on the
wrong side of that piece. part of moving to the right side of cybernetics means we need to operate our security as much we can, particularly the baseline pieces. to go past automation, we want to get to economist tools that actually self-learn and can start taking actions on a network either to stop/quarantine the attack so it doesn't get lateral movement. and maybe the biggest thing we have to do in d.o.d. is develop an enterprise culture. cyber is forcing us to think different about that. unlike other areas, cyber truly is enterprise, 'cause it's connected. you can't help it. it's going to be a connected piece. and we have to get much better at that at d.o.d. we need to think about what it means to be an enterprise, where we're going to act as an enterprise, under what circumstances do we need to act as an enterprise. that gets us to mission security and cost effectiveness.
without getting that balance right, we won't achieve cost effectiveness in security. it means we have to look at economic tools much closer than we have in the past. it also means we need to partner with industry, and i mean truly partner. you heard, i'm a history major. i actually in college couldn't decide what i did, so i majored in pre-med, pre-law and economics, so i ended up with a multitude of degrees. but if you look at world war ii, we had a much different relationship with industry in the second world war. we need to look at how we re-establish some of that. it was not uncommon for industry and civil sector to move back and forth with employment, to have industry partners working right inside the projects. i think we have to start thinking about how we do that. that's particularly true in cyber i.t. because we do not own the market space. we're a big influencer, but we don't own it. if you're buying a submarine, we kind of own the market space.
if you're buying an aircraft carrier, we kind of own the market space. if you're buying software in technology, we don't own it. in the commercial world, they're actually doing more innovation in that area than we are, so it's really critical that we partner with that. we're doing a couple things to expand that. some of you have reported on this and know we're doing it. for the first time, we're putting civilians out into companies. we had done that with military, but we're now putting civilians out in six-month tours with i.t. companies, and we're bringing i.t. company personnel into d.o.d. we've done that with cisco. this year, we're going to do it with about ten companies and they will be either on the d.o.d., my staff, or they'll be on the service cio staffs. and they'll be in areas we think we need to expand on, and how do you do software-defined networking. that's an area we think we need expertise in.
automated security, we already talked about that. so we'll pick areas that we need that match up with the companies. we'll certainly make sure we have all the right nda so nobody gets any advantage and we've done that in the past. but i think that's things that we're going to have to do to make sure that we continue to have the edges that we gain through our use of the cyber and technology. and they will also help us get to an enterprise thought process. i also think we'll help industry through enterprise. i think one of the things we'll see in industry, there's going to have to be more partnering in the i.t. business. there is nobody who corners all of this. it's going to take much more partnering, i think, among the industry players for this to work. i really think that's going to have to be a major change in the way industry does business, too. i think you'll see more smaller companies partnering with mid and bigger companies so that they can scale. that's a problem for us in d.o.d. one of the constant issues i have faced, is, look, we have this great tool and we tested it
for 25,000 people and i say that's good, but now you have to test it for a million. that's hard for smaller companies. i do think partnering with bigger companies is the way that's going to have to head to keep pricing and delivery speed in the right place. i think that sets the stage and i'm happy to take your questions. >> i have one or two and then we'll go to jason miller, olivia stromm, mark thompson, and sharon sorcher to begin. let me ask you about the cyber economic curve. you talked about the fact that an enemy -- in another speech, you talked about the fact that an enemy can spend, quote, a fairly small sum of money and cause us to spend quite a bit. right now, we're on the wrong side of that cyber economic curve, end quote. how are you going to change -- can you change that curve, and if so, how are you doing that? >> yeah, no, i think we can change. one of the things we're doing with our cyber culture and our cyber basics is you raise the
playing level. when you get your cyber basics right and you've got people doing the right things, frankly, you eliminate all of the small-end players. and that's one of the things we have to do. the other piece of that will be bringing on the economist tools so that what we are doing is we're doing that with an automated piece, not with an intensive manpower. manpower's what costs money. so i think as we get there, you will see that it will get more expensive to cause us problems. and so i do think we can get to the right side of that curve. >> and is that, in terms of time horizon, is that a three, five or -- >> i think that's an 18- to 24-month plan to get us there. we might not be, at the end of 24 months, exactly where we want to be, but i think we'll be very close and we will have eliminated much of the -- what i'll call the canned attacks that are somewhat successful today that you can download from the internet.
>> one last from me and then we'll move on. i was interested reading, in getting ready for this, that you're operating what appears to somebody who doesn't know a lot to be diverse ends of security spectrum. you talked in public speeches about rolling out at the pentagon, quote, secure enough mobile devices, and then the industry was fascinated when you mentioned, i guess earlier this month, working on a top secret-capable device that would let forces communicate anywhere any time at a top-secret level. so what are the challenges of operating at two different ends of the security spectrum? >> i don't think the challenges are much different. you've got to get the right security level for the mission and the time and the cost. so, you know, you want -- the ts capability obviously would be for a small number of users in a very select set of missions.
the more mobile device that's for everybody, obviously the scale of that's bigger, but the analysis you do to decide what's the right level of security, what's the right cost you want to spend is really not much different in terms of process for the high end of security or the low end of security. it really is getting -- and secure enough actually applies to everything. this is a little bit of a joke, but everybody tells me, i can secure the network today, i really can. i can secure it completely in the next five minutes. now, it would be completely shut down and we would get no work done, but it would be perfectly secure. this is a balance. it always is a balance and it's a balance across time, money, mission, threat, and it's getting that right. the other thing, i think, that we have to do that's part of that is understanding your data. most of the data that we have -- and i joke about this, but i'm really thinking harder and harder about it -- i think data ought to come with -- you know how the milk
carton comes with "use by"? data ought to come with a stamp that says, "after this date, who cares?" it's perishable. you know, i tell a little bit of a story back in my younger career where i was part of an operation where we used to have these squad radios so i could yell, "mary ann, duck." mary ann could get that quickly and she could duck. well, we did this thing where people decided they had to be encrypted, and i will tell you everything that you can believe. this is a truism. if a threat can put small arms fire onto you, they know where you are. that's a given. so we encrypted this, so by the time you yelled "duck" when it went through the encryption, you no longer had to worry about duck. it was a different problem. so you got to be secure enough for the environment. if the enemy knows where you are and they can put small-arms fire on you, maybe that doesn't need to be encrypted. and we don't encrypt that now, we have better ways of doing it, but back then, that was a
problem. i think knowing what your data's perishability is something else. >> jason, go for it. >> terry, can you talk a little bit about the cyber implementation plan the chairman just talked about? you mentioned some of the pieces and parts of it. >> first of all, we go after the basics. the basics include things like, you know, higher education levels and more tools around some of the common attacks like spear fishing, setting up fake websites, things like that. and it's a combination of tools, culture and training and education. that's kind of step one. step two raises it to the next level where we really start looking at more advanced attacks and how do we prevent those. and it's the same type of combination of training, education and tools, but they're just more advanced, you have to have more education, more training.
and it's really also educating leaders at every level what their responsibilities are and what they need to know. and when you're growing up as -- and i actually started as an infantry officer. they teach you very quickly what things when you go out to your units that you should ask that can tell you rather quickly if the unit's prepared. we have to do the same thing in cyber. what questions should you be asking about cyber as a commander at any level? we've also developed, in conjunction with all of this, a cyber scorecard that measures a series of things and will change. as we get good at certain basics, we'll move that up. we just had about an hour and a half discussion with sec def on that. i laid out for him how that would change and the progression of that. one of the first attempts that will measure that consistently across all levels and across all forces.
it includes co-coms, each of the agencies, each of the services. everybody gets to be measured. it's an interesting drill because i think it's an area where we were used to measuring readiness in other areas, we frankly weren't doing that cyber. again, i don't think that should surprise anybody. cyber is a relatively new warfare. if you look at the history of aviation, you look at the history of how we developed nuclear, it took us a while to get to this point. i think the big difference in cyber though that we're having to react to is it moves faster than any other warfare area. so, that's a challenge. the things we do today in cyber probably won't be the same things we do tomorrow. that's frustrating on industry, too, and i'll share that. you know, we did our latest cloud documentation working with industry. we brought industry in, we helped them write the policy priorities. but one of the things they wanted to do was put in, this will be good for a year, this will be good for two years. the answer is no. it will be good as long as the
threat and technology says it's good. when that changes in cyber, you've got to be able to roll fast. it's hard for any big institution to grasp at that. it's hard for industry to do that. it's accelerated change and we're generally not good at accelerated change as humans, period. >> oliver knox from yahoo! >> i thank you for coming. roughly how often per hour, per day, pick whatever time you want, are systems tested by foreign hackers? have you seen a shift in their targets since the opm hack? >> there is no time i'm not being attacked somewhere in the world. >> have they changed since the opm attack? >> i don't think they've changed. we may see a little more collection on data collection, data disruption. >> but not things like food distribution versus missiles,
anything like that? >> to the extent i can comment on that, no. >> and you mentioned establishing a culture of cyber discipline. i have some active duty friends who have posted things on facebook they probably shouldn't have and things like that. is there such a thing as a cyber boot camp, is that something you're looking to establish for people? >> i don't think we'll be doing a cyber boot camp. this is cyber so it will probably be done in the cyber environment. but i think some of the things we're doing would be like the basics you would get in another boot camp, only we're delivering them through a cyber means. >> chris stromm from bloomberg. >> secretary carter mentioned in the spring that a russian hacker got into dod's network. can you elaborate a little bit, when did that happen? do they actually steal any information? >> the answer to your question is no, i can't elaborate on that. >> ian clapper has said that russian hackers are the most sophisticated hackers, or they've been the most aggressive lately.
what's your assessment of the threat of russian hackers versus the threat of hackers from other nations. >> given that ian said it, it's probably true. >> what is your vision of hackers? >> i think the russian hackers are a serious threat. >> we will go to mark thompson from "time." >> last month before the house armed services committee, you were asked, what keeps you up at night, and you said foremost in your mind was the fact that terrorists might be launching offensive cyber attacks. >> i don't think i said that, i think mike rogers said that, but that's okay. >> i've got the transcript right here, sir. i think it was you. >> i don't actually think so, but go ahead. >> then that makes that moot. leon panetta was in our offices in new york three years ago and
he warned of an electronic pearl harbor. ian said there's probably not going to be a cyber armageddon. rather, it's going to be this sort of gradual incrementalism of problems and troubles. is this going to be a persistent thing? it's going to basically become white noise? we've been hearing about an electronic pearl harbor for a long time, and industry plainly keeps waiting for it to happen before they're going to roll out a lot of big money. where is the threat? how much is a cyber pearl harbor and how much of it is just a persistent white noise we have to learn to grapple with? >> i don't know that anybody can answer that. i would tell you two things. industry certainly is shifting money now, big money, into cybersecurity. a lot of that happened after the target attack. that will tend to get you spurred when the coo, cio, ceo all got fired. we see that. we talk to industry a lot. i'll tell you when i knew cybersecurity was getting really important to industry. i was giving a speech, and after
a speech, i was getting questions from these two gentlemen. lots of good questions and i said, where are you from? they said coors miller. i'm trying to think, coors miller financial -- no, it was coors miller beer. i think the industry is getting this. the financial sector certainly got it a while back. is there a potential for a cyber pearl harbor? probably. i think it will depend on what scale of engagement you're going on about. in kind of the normal phase zero, yeah, i think there will be persistent cyber probing, there will be persistent testing of cyberthreat technology. i think that is something we're going to live with. i don't think, again, that should surprise us. any time we've had new technology, that's what happens. it gets probed. as it matures, it certainly becomes more available for threat to look at it. i think that's going to continue in the cyber world.
and it will depend on -- a little bit on how much nations decide they want to cooperate, too, and i don't think there's any answer that's come in on that yet. we certainly hoped it will get to some of that, but i don't think we will see that -- i don't think we're going to see quite the cyber cooperation we think for a while longer yet. >> here's your quote about offensive cyber attacks. >> i see it's an extract from the testimony. i really don't remember that. i thought mike rogers was terrorism, but we'll check. >> i have been known to make mistakes. >> hey, shawn. >> in terms of j and e, there was a report earlier this week by the "new york times" that russian vessels may be probing underwater cable links, and i'm wondering what role jie can have in warding that off, if you've
gone through those scenarios and if you think you're prepared to handle that threat. >> shawn, be really careful. cables are certainly always a concern. jie really won't have any impact on that one way or the other. they're looking at the physical part of the cable. no way jie plays in that. >> okay. how are you prepared to defend against the physical part? >> that i'm not going to talk about. that gets into a whole bunch of classified programs on how we protect the cables. >> sara sorcher from pesco. >> admiral mike rogers said earlier this year that the government's focus on defense isn't working and that it's time to consider boosting the military's offensive capability in this space. kerry asked the cio for your opinion. what do you think, if you're feeling this need pretty consistently, and as the u.s. considers it, what does that look like? >> i think that's probably a question to ask mike rogers. i'll give you my quick summary on it.
as the cio, i am responsible for the defense and the security side of that. i don't think it's a secret we are looking at what offensive actions could the u.s. take. i think there is always things we're considering. we don't, however, discuss that in public, other than we're considering those things. >> so do you also feel a need to move into that space and go -- expand the definition of defense? >> i think what we're telling you is we're probably already in that space, and how much of that do you -- i think this is more of the question. but how much do you publicize of that so it becomes more of an external awareness that would be in some way a deterrent? again, that's an area that we tend not to talk too much about in public. >> down at the end of the table, mr. marks from politico. >> you talked a little bit about
the program you're working on -- the embed program you're working on in private companies. can you go into some more detail on who those people are, and specifically, i imagine there are people who work from the d.o.d. to industry or the intelligence areas who already have clearances and so forth. is that the type of people you're looking for? >> we don't actually have the number of people you would think move from industry into d.o.d., and there's a really good reason for that. if you do that, you're generally taking a fairly significant salary cut. what we're looking at is some of our top government performers who have predominantly been government going out to industry and learning a couple things. there are certainly some technical things we want to learn. we also want to learn how the industry is doing their business processes. that's important for us. and one of the things that in the office we spend more time than they have in the past is understanding what businesses are doing, what do they understand our economic drivers are, understanding what they're investing in in the future to see if we can influence that, if that makes sense.
so they'll be doing all of those things inl areas that we really think that we need to get some better read on. and we've talked about some of those. some of that is -- it's called software-defined networking, software-defined route, whatever you want to call it. it's a software-based tool. that has a big advantage for us. it lets you be more agile. you don't have to replace the hardware as much as you can update it with the software. it's also cost-effective for us to do that. we're looking 13 to 15 grade levels so that they've got a good track record of high performance inside the government. >> we're going the other direction -- the two-year programs you talk about we're going from industry to government. >> it's a one-year program that they come in to us.
again, we're looking at industry to help us solve some specific areas. so in the case of cisco, they gave us a routing specialist. that's what they do, cisco routers. as we look at other companies, we'll bring in kind of what their sweet spot is in things. certainly this year, we're looking for some software-defined pick your name expertise. modular data center technology. i do think that's going to be bigger as you look at it. we are certainly continuing our effort to close data centers. we have too much capacity. but as you do that, you start looking at -- the modular data centers can run at higher temperatures, they run with lower manpower and less power. it is still true the number one cost driver in a center is labor. i have said it before and i will say it again. right now in d.o.d., our labor costs are higher than industry. i've got to get those labor costs down, and some of that is applying newer technology, and this industry has been able to apply it faster than we have. >> can you explain just for a novice why your labor costs would be higher -- you're saying if you move from private industry to d.o.d., you typically take a pay cut.
so the reason your pay costs are generally higher -- >> because our data centers are not at the same level technology as industry, the really leading industry, we just -- we just have a sheer number of people hired. it truly is count the numbers. it takes us, in general, more people to do the same number of things that industry can do less. and industry is really leading. you've got data centers now in some of the really advanced companies that are completely lights out. even five years ago in industry, what used to take 25, 30 people to do, they're now doing with ten people in a central location managing three of those sites. we've got to get to that same type of level. >> going to go next to tammy abdallah from the associated press. >> so, you know, your discussion about partnering with the private industry, and you
touched a little bit on this issue of labor costs. i mean, this has been a longstanding problem with local government as well as state as well as federal, trying to get private industry to come back to government and avoid that sort of brain drain of government folks, really good government folks usually, heading out to private industry. aside from trying to get labor costs down, what other ideas do you guys have about ensuring the people that, you know, it's not a one-way street? >> one of the things, and probably the single best recruiting tool we have is our mission sit. we are able to keep people, and frankly, attract some people from industry, because the one thing you get to do in d.o.d., there is nobody that's got more exciting things to work on. that's our biggest advantage. that will work for a while. but i tell you what i worry about is when you get into the kind of your middle years in this, that's when you're having kids, you're looking at college costs, and people come to you and offer you what can be two or
three times what your current salary is, that's hard for even the mission to hold that. and frankly, we are seeing some drain, and i'm not winning that war right now. i'm losing. we're looking at some special pay legislation, easier ways to recruit. we're working on it. we have some and i can do some hiring under some special cyber acts, but i can't really compete very well on the pay. i don't think we're gonna be able to compete on the pay. maybe we get a little closer, that would help. i honestly don't have a good answer how we win that one. >> mark signal from mcclatchy. >> i'm curious what the trust factor is when you talk about working with private industry. because it seems to me the last few years, one of the major themes has been a lack of trust between private industry and the federal government, particularly
the pentagon over nsa spying, encryption, et cetera, et cetera. and i wondering when you talk about partnering more with private industry, are you finding private industry willing to do that, or do you have a big trust issue you have to overcome? >> within d.o.d., with our partners, i don't have a big trust issue, and i think there are two reasons for that. i'm not naive enough to think that the first reason is i spend $36.8 billion a year. that buys a lot of potential trust. but i'm going to say this, and i actually had a very good discussion on this on my trip overseas. i do think american industry responds to d.o.d. very well and has a very great history of doing that. i was talking yesterday at a table where i was speaking at milcom. and a lady gave me a suggestion, and i think i'm going to follow up on it, that we have industry
with us on a forward edge. when we tell industry, listen, we need help in getting smaller communications to this far-flung unit and we need people out there, they deliver. when you talk to the industry that get this, they are very supportive of defending the industry. i don't see a big trust problem. do i think there are industries that worry about parts of d.o.d.? yeah, but that's generally not the industries that i'm doing as much business with. the ones that are doing business with d.o.d., i don't see a big trust problem. as a matter of fact, i applaud them. we give them a challenge. they're generally up to meeting it. >> may i add something to that? >> sure. >> the cybersecurity problem is very complex, it's very
distributed, it's very difficult and it's something we all share. we've had great partnerships with them as we figure out together as a nation, as an industry, as a department of defense how we're going to figure out that problem. we share successes we've had. we've had a lot of great dialogue with our big industry partners on how they're doing that, how they're having successes in their companies, things we may want to look at, so i think there's been great collaboration. >> anybody who hasn't had one that wants one. yes, ma'am? then we'll go down there. yes? >> hi. so earlier this week, we saw that the d.o.d. cybersecurity culture and compliance initiative memo came out. i was wondering, what does this memo mean for your office, and how are you carrying out some of the directives that are inside it, like the directives for culture change? >> well, amber, as we talked about, we certainly looked at how we're changing the training to get it down to every level
and going up to every level, getting it to all the commanders. we are expanding what we look at in the cyber scorecard. i do think the things you measure will get attention, and we are now measuring those things. we're having a lot more discussion with industry, as mary ann said, about how we better share all of the data that's available from both industry and the d.o.d. on what the threats are, how to counter the threats and then passing that around to both our partners in the industry and outside the d.o.d. and orchestrate it in the right way to get that culture change and that's what we're trying to do. you asked specifically what my role in my organization is to make sure that gets done. we do the measurements and we are trying to make sure the orchestration gets with all the data at the right time.
>> how are you measuring? >> are we doing the two-factor authentication? are the systems administrators using tokens so we know what systems administrators are on the networks? have we put all of our public-facing and forward-facing, meaning on the internet, servers behind the right set of firewalls or other security boundaries? firewalls will change here somewhat. but there will still be a security boundary, whatever that technology is. have we looked at how all of our data is encrypted or not? when -- there's times when data should be encrypted and are we following all those processes?
>> next to greg otto. federal scoop news. >> thank you for taking my question. you had talked earlier about partnering with industry, particularly smaller partners. i know d.o.d. has stood up an experimental innovation unit in silicon valley, so i would love to hear your thoughts of how that process is going in the early stages. >> i think it's going about how you would think in the early stages. we're making some progress. we're still learning that. it's out there really to learn how silicon valley does business than to teach silicon valley how d.o.d. does business. i think that's a key that the secretary set very smartly for that. here's what d.o.d., when it comes down to it, if you're a small business and you're doing your innovation, you live on a three- to six-month funding cycle. if you don't get money in the three- to six-month window, they're not there anymore. that's what they have to do to pay back their backers. we're generally not turning that fast, so one of the things we try to do up there is how do we make the smaller investments we have to make faster to buy some
influence? and i think we're doing okay. i would tell you the secretary probably thinks we need to do better and be able to still get faster. the other thing that unit is doing is not educating silicon valley about our business process at d.o.d. but actually educating about our processes and what do we need? what are the areas that we need the most help with? i think that part of it is going really well. and we've coupled that with -- we've had a couple trips out to silicon valley. we will have -- when i say silicon valley, it's the concept more than the location. we've put one out in california, but we're taking a trip -- my deputy will leave up the east coast, because there's actually a lot of innovation going on in boston, new york, places like that. so we want to make sure we're not just capturing what's out in the physical silicon valley but getting that concept.
we're even looking at some places -- you know, there's some interesting innovations going on in london and places like that. how do we make sure we capture all that? so in addition to partnering with industry, we're also doing better relationships with our counterparts. i spent quite a bit of time on the phone with mike stone, who is the u.k.'s cio for their ministry of defense. we exchanged ideas. i just came back from australia to see how they're doing. they're a little smaller, they can turn faster, but they're the exact same problems. so we can look and see a little bit what fails or succeeds faster, which is a big help for us. >> i'm going to keep moving around the table, but i want to ask a question, if i can, about veterans. we were talking before the breakfast started that you were scheduled to testify on tuesday to the house committee on oversight and government reform about electronic records interoperability between the
d.o.d. and the v.a. you were out of town and had a deputy there. as you know, former secretary gates lamented that he never succeeded in cracking the bureaucracy and said if there is one bureaucracy more attractive intractable than defense, it's the v.a. so how does the record inoperability thing stand? i ask that as an older veteran myself. >> it's getting better. i don't think it's good enough. and i guess i would answer more about what we in d.o.d. are doing. i'm sure all of you are aware we have just signed a contract to make d.o.d. more commercial- like. we're going to have commercial and we're using a very broadly accepted commercial software to do that. we're spending a lot of time
looking at how to make that work better. we are actually taking more and more commercial practices. now, i think that what d.o.d. will do, and this is just my opinion, that is an area of business where i think we will tend to continue to move more and more commercial. i think that is a place where the commercial market frankly does it better than the government. >> and is there a sense the v.a. is doing the same thing? >> i'm not going to comment on the v.a. >> i've been trying to get mr. mcdonald to come. we'll see if that happens. anyone else? yes, sir. >> on tuesday, the senate after five, six years of hammering finally passed a cybersecurity bill to expand information sharing. even a lot of its supporters including harry reed have said this is a very weak bill, a
small step, we really need to do a lot more. how useful will expanded information sharing be to your purpose and what else would you like to see legislatively from congress? >> i think any time congress takes this and talks, and even if it's weaker legislation, i think the legislation will help. i think the liability will help people share in anything that encourages people to share data here is a good thing. if you ask me, the biggest piece of legislation i needed hopefully the senate will pass tomorrow, and that's the budget. it is -- i don't know that everybody understands when you're working on what amounts to be a nine-month fiscal year, and we've done that for seven years, nobody can do that right. you will get inefficient and you
will lose gains. so the big legislation is hopefully the senate will pass the budget bill tomorrow. we were glad to see the house do so last night. >> anyone else who hasn't -- yes, ma'am, i'm sorry. >> a couple questions. a few years ago, chelsea manning leaked a number of documents. >> can you speak into the microphone? thank you. >> a few years ago, chelsea manning leaked a number of documents to wikileaks, and after that there was an executive order to create some sort of insider threat initiative. government-wide but particularly at d.o.d. have you fully implemented that? what's the status of that? are you fairly confident? >> the answer to have we fully implemented is really hard to say yes. have we implemented to the known threats? yes. but as we talked earlier, that's another area that keeps evolving. are we where we want to be, i think, in terms of how quickly we can use analysis and adapt to that, no. but have we done some very good things about that? yes.
want to talk about how you look at what our norms for people searching their data. there are norms that people should stay in within data by their job position. we certainly look at that. >> when someone deviates from that, you know to look at them more closely? >> yes. when you talk about insider threat, it really does tend to be, what are you looking at that's deviation from the norm? now, as the threats get more sophisticated, you've got to get more sophisticated at being able to understand that, and that's where i think we have to continue to develop and figure out how we do faster -- frankly, faster forecaster analysis. that's hard. we need to do that across the board. one of the things that we've done with the cio staff and some of the other staff, there is a book out called "flash foresight."
interesting book, and it's written not by a futurist but a guy who was a biologist. he says, these things are certain to happen unless you have some cataclysmic event. these are things that are going to happen unless you take an act to stop them. when you start looking at it that way, i think it gives you more focus and a better ability to be more predictive. we're constantly looking how to do that. i think that's the key. >> so the nsa has the assurance division. there's cyber command which also has a unit to help defend networks, not the defend the nation teams but more of a defensive helping to support the cybersecurity aspect of the d.o.d. networks. and then there's your guys. >> then there's what? >> then there's your office, right? the cio. what distinguishes your -- >> so we're policy and money.
we actually own the iea money. nsa, their ia is looking at what i'll call the broad strategic. they get down to the technical tools. keib cybercomm is what you take from that industry and offer. >> so you don't have operational. >> i don't have direct operational control. we certainly play in operations typically around the defense like measuring the scorecard issues, but yeah, we are basically policy in balance. >> anybody who hasn't or we can do a second round? this is a quiet moment, this doesn't happen very often, so let me ask you about contracting challenges. the deputy secretary of defense for cyber policy was at an event at the center for strategic international studies and talking about the challenges that you face, that the defense department faces in acquisition
that you need to be careful that you're not buying things that build in a security threat. he was talking about poor hygiene effects, poor security built into products, poor security on networks that you are absolutely looking at regulations that can help define what those standards are. where does that effort stand, sir? >> i think we are in pretty good shape on that. we have published a lot lately. frank kendall put out directives that are required for contractors that are going to be in the network or network tool providers. they must do a little bit more about securing their supply chain. they must have certain things in their contract. they must make certain code available to us to review. do i think that completely solves the problem? no. and i think that's another one where the problem is speed because what we tend to do there is we're writing policy about what the known threats are and what known has happened.
that's what you do. again, how do we get ahead of that is the challenge there. what's the next place that the threats will go to look at even in the supply chain or what else will they try to do in marketing different tools. i mean the other problem you have in today's contracting world is the fast pace of what company owns what company. that is a concern for us. you know, you find out -- >> in terms of foreign ownership? >> yeah, absolutely. so that's -- and again, it's just the pace. the pace at what change happens in every aspect in the cyber i.t. world makes acquisition harder because while you must acquire with higher speed, you also must do all the extra due diligence that the threat -- i mean, they're absolutely in opposing affects so how do you balance that? that will continue to be a challenge. >> last question, mark thompson.
>> cycling back to that hastert hearing last month and i think you said, yes, we are enforcing accountability among our people who are responsible for poor cyber hygiene. when you're asked, well, what did you do, you declined to say. if you're trying to change the culture, isn't there an element of deterrence in letting folks know if you make this error, this is what's going to happen? why you won't say for the chairman of the joint chiefs intrusion, without naming the people, what accountability was meted out? >> the proper accountability. yes, there's the deterrence in the people who inside the d.o.d. need to know that. i don't think that's a topic i need to talk about outside of the d.o.d. like going to "time" magazine saying when you do editorial review boards, do you publicize that? >> when we make a mistake we generally publicize it and print it.
that's an interesting question. >> i don't see much other than the one letter retraction with a we made a mistake. i don't see that the reporter was -- we say we took the proper action. we are saying the same thing. i'm not going to tell you what specifically happened by individual. what actions we take. >> how about general? >> generally what we have done in some cases we have applied ucmj where that's appropriate. written counseling where that's appropriate. we have taken the appropriate actions given the tools that d.o.d. has to take those appropriate actions. >> has anybody ever been fired? >> absolutely. >> thank you. >> on that cheery note, we'll -- thank you both for doing this. we really appreciate it. >> thank you. thank you. they were great questions. thank you. >> thank you. president barack obama laid a wreath at arlington national cemetery this veterans day on the 97th anniversary of the end of world war i. he said the nation is in the midst of a new wave of veterans who served in iraq, afghanistan
and elsewhere. he asked communities and businesses to consider hiring veterans as they fill job openings. this afternoon at 5:30 with a discussion on what's next for turkey after the results of recent elections there. the conversation takes place at the bipartisan policy center. a signature feature of c-span 2's book tv is coverage of book fairs and fess values from across the country with nonfiction author talks, interviews, viewer call-in segments. coming up book tv will be live from 32nd annual miami book fair. our coverage starts on saturday november 21st at 10:00 a.m. eastern. authors include representative john lewis discussing his book march, book 2, a live call-in with "wall street journal" columnist and author peggy noonan who talks about her book.
and "a reporter's journey." "lights out, surviving @math." first p.j. o'rourke takes calls. joy an reed you frarks you barack obama, the clintons and racial divide. join us live from miami on c-span 2's book tv. be sure to follow and tweet us your questions @booktv and @c-span on twitter. the supreme court heard oral argument this month in foster versus chapman, a case dealing with the jury selection process for the trial of timothy foster. the court will decide if the selection was unconstitutional because race was a factor in eliminating potential jurors. in 1986, the court ruled